Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updated test FMUs with OpenModelica v1.18.0-dev.192 #999

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 30, 2021

Conversation

AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@AnHeuermann AnHeuermann added the CI/MINGW32 Activate mingw32 build and test in PR label Mar 29, 2021
@AnHeuermann AnHeuermann self-assigned this Mar 29, 2021
@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 29, 2021

What version of OpenModelica did you use? 1.17.0 is already too old. It should be OMCompiler v1.18.0-dev.171+gc263934f53 or never.

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 29, 2021

And did you do the submodule updates on purpose or by mistake?

@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

AnHeuermann commented Mar 29, 2021

What version of OpenModelica did you use? 1.17.0 is already too old. It should be OMCompiler v1.18.0-dev.171+gc263934f53 or never.

Then I'll use todays master.

And did you do the submodule updates on purpose or by mistake?

Dang it...

  - Initial unknowns from OpenModelica FMUs are now correct.
    Removed warnings from reference results.
Copy link
Member

@lochel lochel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good with all the warnings gone 😃

@lochel lochel changed the title Updated test FMUs with OpenModelica 1.17.0 Updated test FMUs with OpenModelica v1.18.0-dev.192 Mar 29, 2021
@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 29, 2021

Which test case is it? Your link doesn't work for me.

@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

testsuite/OMSimulator/PI_Controller.lua

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 29, 2021

I guess you refer to PI_Controller.lua. This is fine. The new results are better due to proper initialization 👍

@lochel lochel removed the CI/MINGW32 Activate mingw32 build and test in PR label Mar 29, 2021
@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

AircraftVehicleDemonstrator is failing, but I didn't change that FMUs.
Any ideas @lochel?

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 29, 2021

Those FMUs don't run on 32bit Windows. However, I have no clue why it also failed on 64bit Windows....

@arun3688
Copy link
Contributor

@AnHeuermann I tested your PR in my computer and the AircraftVehicleDemonstrator worked for me

@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

Now it worked. Should we merge it?

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 30, 2021

@adrpo, @sjoelund It seems that the behaviour is different on different Windows machines in our jenkins cluster.

@lochel lochel merged commit 321492b into OpenModelica:master Mar 30, 2021
@AnHeuermann AnHeuermann deleted the updateFMUs branch March 30, 2021 08:43
@sjoelund
Copy link
Member

@adrpo, @sjoelund It seems that the behaviour is different on different Windows machines in our jenkins cluster.

So it fails on the real Windows and succeeded on the virtual machine?

@AnHeuermann
Copy link
Member Author

Do we have some time limits for the test? The AircraftVehicleDemonstrator test is slow:
On my Windows with OMDev and OMSimulator build as standalone I need around 215 seconds with both clang and gcc.
But both are working.

@adrpo
Copy link
Member

adrpo commented Mar 30, 2021

Testing using rtest on windows machines is really very unreliable. rtest hangs sometimes, other issues pop up, etc.

@adrpo
Copy link
Member

adrpo commented Mar 30, 2021

For example, on windows OMSimulator hanged 20 hours already. In general is perl that hangs running rtest and you need to kill it manually.
https://test.openmodelica.org/jenkins/blue/organizations/jenkins/OMSimulator/detail/PR-999/2/pipeline

@arun3688
Copy link
Contributor

@AnHeuermann I did not measure the time, but in my computer also it took close to 5 minutes to finish

@lochel
Copy link
Member

lochel commented Mar 30, 2021

I think the problem here is more related to numeric. The example finished in both cases, but with slightly different numeric results. So it might be a different boost version or any other lib?! Not really sure though.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants